General News
Below are links to stories of general interest in relation to aviation and airports.
Nobel laureates demand European Commission action to classify oil from tar sands as very high carbon
Twenty-one Nobel prize winners, many of whom have won Nobel Peace Prizes, have urged the EU to immediately implement the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD) which would label tar sands as higher carbon ("dirtier") than other fuels. The Nobel laureates say the extraction of unconventional fuels – such as oil sands and oil shale – is having a particularly devastating impact on climate change. The powerful letter has attempted to restart the discussion about how tar sands and oil shale should be treated in the EU, a discussion that has been delayed for too long, following a massive lobbying campaign by Canada, the US and the global oil industry. Conventional oil has been given a value of 87.5g of CO2 equivalent per megajoule. In comparison, tar sands oil has a value of 107g, oil shale 131g and coal-to-liquid 172g. The laureates quote IEA warnings that unconventional fuel sources are especially damaging to the environment and climate, and its calculation that two-thirds of known fossil-fuel reserves must be left in the ground ‘to avoid catastrophic climate change’. The letter says the time for positive action is now. The EU can demonstrate clear and unambiguous leadership on this.
Click here to view full story...
Treasury Minister confirms APD is necessary and government has no plans to reduce it
On 23rd October there was an "Opposition day debate" in the Commons, on Air Passenger Duty -especially in relation to Northern Ireland. There were attempts by some MPs with no interest in environmental concerns, to make out that APD is a "green tax", (and so, along with other "green taxes" should be cut, in the misjudged belief that would benefit the UK economy. The new Economic Secretary to the Treasury, Nicky Morgan, replied for the government, that "we must continue to work hard to reduce the deficit, so if we were to abolish APD, an alternative source for the revenue would need to be found. We never seem to hear any suggestions," and "....the £3 billion that is raised by APD is a significant contribution to the Exchequer when we are tackling the deficit." And "There is also no duty charged on the fuel used in international, and virtually all domestic, flights. .....despite the fiscal challenges, the Government have ensured that APD rates have been frozen in real terms since 2010, rising by just £1 for the vast majority of passengers since then. The Government therefore reject the suggestion that we have pushed taxes on aviation too high."
Click here to view full story...
Manchester airport 28.5 ha car park in public safety zone given go-ahead, despite safety fears from residents
Plans for a 'gigantic' 9,000-space car park under Manchester Airport's flight path have been approved – despite claims it is an accident 'waiting to happen'. Manchester council agreed the proposals at its latest planning meeting, prompting shock from local residents. The airport says it needs the long-stay facility, near the Moss Nook area of Wythenshawe, to replace a 3,000-space car park being lost to part of the Airport City development. The airport claims it would cut traffic and pollution. But the plans will mean building in the airport's 'public safety zone' – the area around the end of a busy runway that is usually left undeveloped to protect people from planes. The risk of a plane crashing, on landing or take-off, is highest there. Residents and ward councillors fear any future plane crash would cause a massive explosion because thousands of petrol tanks would be in one place. Petitions containing more than 2,200 signatures were submitted opposing the move, along with 34 formal letters of objections, while local ward councillors had already voted against it last month. The car park will take uk at least 28.5 hectares of green land.
Click here to view full story...
Tiny Cambridge airport joins the bandwagon, of connecting flights to Schiphol or Paris
Much is said about the possibility of people in the UK taking flights to Amsterdam (or it could be Paris) to get other flights from there - avoiding going via a London airport. Now tiny Cambridge airport, with so few passengers that the CAA data only just record t hem, is claiming it is an international airport, with some flights laid on to Schiphol and Paris, from where people can get onward connections. The airport claims it is much faster to pass through the tiny airport than it would be at a larger London airport. It is making much of the link from Schiphol or Paris to the USA. To be honest, there are a large number of airports that already have flights to Amsterdam. Anyone flying only from the UK to Paris / Amsterdam would pay only the APD for the short haul flight, so they could save themselves so me £45 -50 or so. For anyone flying west from the UK to the USA, going via the European mainland does not make a lot of sense, geographically. Or in terms of carbon. But if they are flying east, and change at some European airport, at least they are taking the pressure off the crowded south east airports. Schiphol seems eager to get its hands on Brits.
Click here to view full story...
AOA makes some unjustifable conclusions from a survey, giving the misleading impression of business dissatisfaction with air links
The Airport Operators Association (AOA) held their two day conference this week. They have put out a press announcement, attempting to make out that a lot of business leaders are not satisfied with existing, or future, air links from the UK. This is a classic case of being able to make almost anything out of a set of numbers, if the aim is public relations spin! Business figures were asked, in a telephone poll, what they thought about UK air links to existing, traditional overseas markets, and to emerging overseas markets. Though the AOA claim that "less than half" were satisfied with UK air links - the figures actually show only some 9 - 10% or so were fairly dissatisfied (only about 2 - 3 % very dissatisfied) and 90% or more were either satisfied or did not know. The AOA add in the "don't know" category. The AOA also asked these business figures if they were confident that the Airports Commission "will deliver solutions for the UK's connectivity needs" and said about 40% are not confident. However, the figures are all over the place, and in reality, slightly more say they are confident that the Commission will deliver and large number expressed a "don't know" opinion.
Click here to view full story...
Willie Walsh tells AOA that a Heathrow 3rd runway will never be built – it is too politically difficult
Willie Walsh has said - at the Airport Operators Association in London - that a 3rd runway at Heathrow will “never” be built - as he claims politicians will always put their election campaigns over national interests. He said nimbyism will stop politicians from doing anything with the findings of Sir Howard Davies’s Airports Commission - and a new Heathrow runway is just politically too difficult.” He claims, rather bitterly, that “This is politics with a small ‘p’. The national interest gets lost as the individual politicians look to understand how this will impact on them getting elected.” Perhaps he is also considering self interest. Sir Howard Davies, also speaking at the AOA conference, said of the airport capacity/new runway decision: “Realistically this is the sort of decision that gets made early in a Parliament if it gets made at all,” as it is too contentious to be dealt with by politicians in the run-up to an election. The Airports Commission know any new runway would take “a decade or more to come into effect” and the process will likely be delayed by legal challenges. The commission already faces the threat of a judicial review after campaign group, Stop Stansted Expansion, initiated legal proceedings earlier this month.
Click here to view full story...
India and the USA oppose EU plan to include flights within European airspace in ETS
India has said it will oppose the EU's plan to include flights from all airlines in European airspace (other than airlines from most developing countries). The USA also opposes the plan, with a US politician saying the EU proposal is contrary to a law intended to shield US airlines from such charges. Last week the European Commission proposed making all airlines pay for emissions only over European airspace - rather than the original system in which the carbon from the full length of all flights using EU airports. USA, India and China want the EU to back down, so no aviation emissions anywhere are included in a charging system. India and China contribute well over 1% of global aviation CO2, so they were included, unlike smaller and poor countries. Reuters says that along with China, India has defied the EU, even refusing to submit emissions data before the EU suspended it for a year amid threats of a trade war. The US might go as far as invoking a law signed by President Barack Obama in November 2012 that would shield Us airlines from what US Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx may deem to be an unfair charge.
Click here to view full story...
Greenwash (inaccurate) statement: “Less CO2 per passenger by air than by car says Virgin”
The aviation industry knows it is provides an exceptionally high carbon way to travel, and is keen to find ways to try to disguise this fact. In reality, a passenger on a medium length flight (2,000 - 4,000 miles or so) in a modern plane is probably responsible for roughly the same amount of carbon as someone driving the same distance alone in a car that does an average around 48 miles per gallon (like at Toyota Yaris). That is excluding non-CO2 climate effects. Approximate figures - each car trip (including number of passengers) is different, as is each plane trip. Saying that air travel per passenger is lower carbon than a car journey is missing the point for two important reasons: 1. Most people would think twice about driving 3,000 or 4,000 miles. And back. It is easy and quick (as well as much cheaper) by plane. So people make these trips more often, and are encouraged to travel more. 2. Figures do not take in to the non-CO2 impacts of aircraft emissions, which are likely to approximately double the climate impact. So now Virgin are trying to make out that flying is lower carbon than driving. This is disingenuous nonsense - comparing chalk and cheese - and is choosing very carefully which figures to use. As WWF-UK point out, Virgin is increasing its number of passengers, and getting people to fly more often, as fast as it can, so raising the overall emissions. Don't be hoodwinked by the greenwash!
Click here to view full story...
Big airports need to grow, says aviation minister Robert Goodwill
Speaking at the Airport Operators Association (AOA) conference on 21st October, Robert Goodwill - who is the new aviation minister - said it was "vital that we support growth in [the aviation] sector" and that the UK "needs to grow its hub capacity," to sustain a wide range of long-haul flights. Listing the recent investment in airports including Birmingham, Manchester and Stansted, he said: "All these good news stories do not, however, provide the hub capacity we need to grow." Goodwill said that the government's main message was that "aviation needs to grow, to support economic expansion, whilst giving due respect to the wider environment and the quality of life of those on the ground". At the same conference Sir Howard Davies reiterated his recent provisional thinking that there is a need to build new runways in the southeast. The AOA now hopes there will no longer be debate over whether there is a need for another runway, but just where it will be. A recent survey done for the AOA showed that only 8% of the businessmen surveyed were dissatisfied with the UK's international air links to either traditional destinations or emerging markets. A tiny minority.
Click here to view full story...
GACC warns that new flight paths proposed by NATS and Gatwick airport could affect thousands around Gatwick
GACC has reacted strongly to proposals to revamp many of the existing flight paths around Gatwick , which have been put forward for consultation jointly by NATS and Gatwick Airport Ltd. These plans, which are nothing to do with a 2nd runway, include new flight paths over areas which are at present peaceful – in order to increase the number of aircraft able to use the runway; more concentrated flight paths based on more accurate aircraft navigation, which will effectively make life hell for many people affected; a major reform of the pattern of aircraft queuing up to land, which will bring aircraft noise to many areas currently not affected; and the possibility of ‘respite’ by using two flight paths on alternate days. This consultation includes nothing to show where the new flight paths might be. Instead it is couched in general terms, asking people to comment on broad concepts. There are no maps, and it is apparently intended that no maps will be produced until after the end of the consultation, and NATS and Gatwick do not intend to hold a second consultation. GACC is advising its members to study the new consultation and to express their views forcefully.